2024 Tube Stock (Siemens Inspiro London)

[100andthirty]

No.

 

[Snow1964]

The end cars are bit longer as have a cab added one end. Presumably it partly acts as counterbalance to half the suspended section other end

 

[AM9]

18 longitudinal seats per side
1992 Stock has 17
1973 Stock has 19

But surely the doors are wider on the 92 stock and even wider on the 24 cars?

 

[NSEWonderer]

Will these units have sliding steps?

It has one step on each cab side door if that is what you mean?

 

[Dstock7080]

It has one step on each cab side door if that is what you mean?

I think gap-filler sliding steps was implied

 

[Thirteen]

I'm curious to see how they adapt it for the Central Line and also W&C Line, the latter only needs two carriages so could arrive sooner.

 

[TRAX]

I'm curious to see how they adapt it for the Central Line and also W&C Line, the latter only needs two carriages so could arrive sooner.

The Central and Waterloo & City fleet hasn’t been ordered nor funded yet, and it’ll certainly be later than the Bakerloo order.

 

[AM9]

I'm curious to see how they adapt it for the Central Line and also W&C Line, the latter only needs two carriages so could arrive sooner.

Would the W&C trains be a subset of the Central ones, i.e. if the 11-car central line trains are:

bogied - link - bogied - link - bogied - link - bogied - link - bogied - link - bogied​

then a W&C could be:

bogied - link - bogied - link - bogied,​

giving a 5-car train that is shorter than half of an 11-car or

bogied - link - bogied,​

which really would be a shuttle!

 

[100andthirty]

Would the W&C trains be a subset of the Central ones, i.e. if the 11-car central line trains are:

bogied - link - bogied - link - bogied - link - bogied - link - bogied - link - bogied​

then a W&C could be:

bogied - link - bogied - link - bogied,​

giving a 5-car train that is shorter than half of an 11-car or

bogied - link - bogied,​

which really would be a shuttle!

Even though the orders are not confirmed yet, the configurations for the Central and W&C options have been defined. They needed to be so that Siemens could price the options. And as stated above and up-thread, Central line is to be 11-car. W&Cis to be 5-car.

 

[DanNCL]

It has one step on each cab side door if that is what you mean?

I think gap-filler sliding steps was implied

Yes, I meant gap filler sliding steps as seen on the various Stadler units and on some Siemens stuff on the continent.

 

[NSEWonderer]

I think gap-filler sliding steps was implied

Ah i see

 

[100andthirty]

But no gap filler steps like Stadler's are specified, nor being provided unless I've missed a late change.

 

[Bletchleyite]

But no gap filler steps like Stadler's are specified, nor being provided unless I've missed a late change.

They're not, but if these will be in service for the next 30 years I don't think making them fully accessible, including on stations with the foot-and-a-half gap like Bank, is too much to ask.

 

[AM9]

Even though the orders are not confirmed yet, the configurations for the Central and W&C options have been defined. They needed to be so that Siemens could price the options. And as stated above and up-thread, Central line is to be 11-car. W&Cis to be 5-car.

Which is the logical replacement for the 2+2car sets that run. A three car set would provide too many driven axles for the relatively relaxed W&C. It's not as if there's likely to be an adhesion issue with gradients, leaves or ice!

 

[rebmcr]

The Central and Waterloo & City fleet hasn’t been ordered nor funded yet, and it’ll certainly be later than the Bakerloo order.

While it's true that the funding remains pending for all of these, the sequence for which come earlier or later is far, far from certain. TfL Committee papers have consistently placed the Central Line before the Bakerloo Line, and it's only corrosion of the latter that would seem likely to bump it up the queue. Life extension programmes are ongoing for both, so ambiguity also remains in that regard.

 

[Wolfie]

Yes, slightly surprised that the bogied cars aren't a bit shorter as well. That would reduce some of the gaps on the bendy platforms at the front and back.

Speculating it may be as simple as they will be hanging all the accessories off them and not on the suspended cars.

 

[ijmad]

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 20 Jul 2023 ==

The bogied cars look very long - I'm surprised the overhang wouldn't belt the platform at Bank.

Yes, slightly surprised that the bogied cars aren't a bit shorter as well. That would reduce some of the gaps on the bendy platforms at the front and back.

The cars not having doors at their very ends will help with the gaps. The closer your door is to the middle of the car, the nearer it will be to the curved platform edge.

 

[py_megapixel]

The cars not having doors at their very ends will help with the gaps. The closer your door is to the middle of the car, the nearer it will be to the curved platform edge.

Only if the platform is on the inside of the curve! If it's on the outside of the curve, the opposite is true.

 

[Snow1964]

The cars not having doors at their very ends will help with the gaps. The closer your door is to the middle of the car, the nearer it will be to the curved platform edge.

where track is on outside of curve, middle will be nearer to platform, but if platform is on outside then gap is bigger, and doors near ends will be closer to platform.

 

[Mikey C]

While it's true that the funding remains pending for all of these, the sequence for which come earlier or later is far, far from certain. TfL Committee papers have consistently placed the Central Line before the Bakerloo Line, and it's only corrosion of the latter that would seem likely to bump it up the queue. Life extension programmes are ongoing for both, so ambiguity also remains in that regard.

The 92 stock upgrades are more significant than those for the Bakerloo, which mechanically are still pretty much original! Surely they have to be replaced first?

 

[AM9]

The 92 stock upgrades are more significant than those for the Bakerloo, which mechanically are still pretty much original! Surely they have to be replaced first?

I doubt the footfall on the Bakerloo line is anywhere near that of the Central line,so the central line's need is probably greater.

 

[TRAX]

I doubt the footfall on the Bakerloo line is anywhere near that of the Central line,so the central line's need is probably greater.

That’s not completely how it works, though. The 1992 Tube Stock is much more recent, in better nick, and has been refurbished.

 

[setdown]

92 stock may be in better condition mechanically, but cosmetically they’re a disgrace. Much worse than Bakerloo trains.

 

[Wolfie]

That’s not completely how it works, though. The 1992 Tube Stock is much more recent, in better nick, and has been refurbished.

Not so sure, given that the 92 stock has a load of obsolete electronics (see the Networkers on National Rail) and has some precedent for bits falling off, that is wholly accurate. The Bakerloo line undoubtedly has corrosion issues but the mechanicals are pretty basic and easily maintained.

 

[NSEWonderer]

One must remember a unit that is heavily used compared to another will rack up crush mileage much faster. As some have also said in addition the 1992 stock was poorly built. The door system for one was one of the poorest decisions I remember compared to the Canadian system they could have adopted. The Bakerloo stock when released was like a Rolls Royce compared to the 1992 stock which was more akin to a Modern day range rover, looks good but internally ****.

 

[Recessio]

They're not, but if these will be in service for the next 30 years I don't think making them fully accessible, including on stations with the foot-and-a-half gap like Bank, is too much to ask.

With the Bakerloo and Picadilly, don't forget that where it is shared with Overground and District services respectively, there are "step-up" platforms where the platform height is above the floor height of the train. Combined with the fact that seemingly every platform has a unique height and curvature, making steps work everywhere could be extremely difficult, perhaps even involving retunnelling to straighten out and level platforms such as Bank's Central line, which clearly isn't going to happen.

 

[nlogax]

Only just catching up with progress, have to say it's a very nice look compared to its other deep level stock brethren. Especially like the black window masking and stripe which thankfully is pretty close to those original renders in 2018.

 

[Recessio]

Not so sure, given that the 92 stock has a load of obsolete electronics (see the Networkers on National Rail) and has some precedent for bits falling off, that is wholly accurate. The Bakerloo line undoubtedly has corrosion issues but the mechanicals are pretty basic and easily maintained.

This is a consistent problem with early 90s units. At least with 70s units they've been using the same equipment for decades, even since WW2, and it's mechanically simple with either lots of salvaged spares available, or its easy to reproduce. Whereas the lead times for replacement components, especially microelectronics, for Turbos, Networkers, and the 92 stock can be a problem.

 

[rebmcr]

With the Bakerloo and Picadilly, don't forget that where it is shared with Overground and District services respectively, there are "step-up" platforms where the platform height is above the floor height of the train. Combined with the fact that seemingly every platform has a unique height and curvature, making steps work everywhere could be extremely difficult, perhaps even involving retunnelling to straighten out and level platforms such as Bank's Central line, which clearly isn't going to happen.

LU has a desire to (at some point) swap the Piccadilly and District termini between Ealing Broadway and Uxbridge; this would eliminate the step height difference. Bakerloo would still need attention.

Bank has already seen re-tunnelling to address platform safety justified and carried out, on the Northern.

"Clearly isn't going to happen" seems rather less clear than you claim.

 

[Thirteen]

This is a consistent problem with early 90s units. At least with 70s units they've been using the same equipment for decades, even since WW2, and it's mechanically simple with either lots of salvaged spares available, or its easy to reproduce. Whereas the lead times for replacement components, especially microelectronics, for Turbos, Networkers, and the 92 stock can be a problem.

But I assume that the older units especially the 1972 stock are becoming harder to maintain. Not a like for like comparison but the Class 483s were completely knackered by the time they left service and I'm not sure they can last until the late 2020s/early 2030s, I know TfL themselves said they was a chance they wouldn't be replaced until the late 2030s or early 2040s but I think that is unlikely.